If I had a dollar for every time a centre-right conservative spoke these words in a conversation with me, I would have enough money to run as a Canadian Donald Trump. The Left endlessly accuses the mainstream Right of being closeted KKK members, who are only professing these platitudes to hide their true agenda of oppressing all the brown people of the world. The truth is, as anyone to the right of NRO readers knows, that these sentiments are sincerely held by most conservatives.

As a result of this belief, many conservatives are profoundly indifferent to the demographic change taking place inside the United States and outside its borders. Indeed, the Census Bureau has reported that non-Hispanic Whites are now a minority among babies being born in the United States. An America where Whites are in the minority isn't a speculative possibility, it is a reality that has already been established. Outside of America, whites continue to decline as a percentage as the total population in White countries such as Denmark, England, Australia, etc. The White percentage of the world's population has been falling for some time now, and with Africa experiencing a population boom that may lead to as many as 2.5 billion Africans by 2050, and 4 billion by 2100, this trend is not going to change.

With the West's borders largely open, we are experiencing unprecedented demographic change. What is the reaction of the typical conservative to this information?

​"....the torch of western civlization doesn't care what color hands bear it forward", according to this comment that I pulled from a conversation I saw below a NRO article. What is this Western Civilization that can apparently be sustained by anyone and everyone? Let's first ask a question of a similar type on a smaller scale; what is Denmark?

An examination of the name of this country gives a simple enough answer. In Danish, the country is called Danmark. Dan- refers to the Dani, an ancient Scandinavian tribe that today we know as Danes; Mark is an old Germanic word for borderland or woodland. In other words, Denmark is the Danes' borderland or the Danes' woodland. In order for there to be a woodland claimed by the Danes, there had to first be a Danish people that existed before the country did. Denmark is named after the Danes, and the Danish are what makes Denmark Denmark, and it is not Denmark that makes the Danish Danish.

The world is full of countries named after the people that founded them after they immigrated there, establishing their laws and customs over the territory. Scotland is the land that has been claimed by the Scots. Angleland, what we now call England, is the land claimed by the Angles who captured the land during a series of migrations and invasions from 400-600 AD. Germany is, in the language of it's people, called Deutschland, the land of the Germans. Outside of Europe we find similar occurrences. Turkey is named after the Turks who captured Anatolia, what had before hand been part of the Byzantine Empire. Further east, we find a whole host of countries named after the peoples who eventually settled the land. Afghanistan, for example, translates into "land of the Afghans", and Kazakhstan is the "land of the Kazakhs". The reason these countries are named after the people who inhabit them is because it is the people that define the country. Their institutions, language, symbols, and ideals are all expressions of these peoples and their national character. It is the national character of the people that defines the country, and when the Angles moved to what is now England they brought their customs with them and defined the land by their presence.

So if the Danes are a group of people that predate Denmark, can there be a Denmark without the Danes? The answer is clearly no. The Danes are Denmark. Denmark is, without a doubt, important to the Danes as it is the land they have come to call home, but is not what makes them who they are. Simply coming to the land of Denmark does not make one Danish, since it is the Danes that define Denmark, not the other way around. Denmark's picturesque canals, artistic output, and reputation for a high standard of living did not exist before the Danes established them.

When this basic understanding of history is forgotten, the consequences are disastrous. When members of a nation move from one part of the world to another, as they have done throughout history, they bring their customs and characteristics with them and change the places they settle. This can be seen in action today in every Western country on the planet.

In Malmö, Sweden, there has been a huge influx of people from the Middle East. Around a third of the city is foreign born, and an additional 11% were born to immigrant parents. If the people didn't matter, they would lose their characteristics upon moving to a new country; the magic dirt of Sweden would surely turn Syrians into Swedes! Instead, the peoples who have moved to this formerly Swedish city have brought their way of living with them.

Quote:

Violent crime is a problem in Malmo now unlike any time in the past, explains former director of criminal intelligence and INTERPOL cop Elofsson: “Sweden became a member of the European Union in 1995 and opened our borders.

“We are part of the Schengen treaty, so you have that freedom of movement which has also brought criminality here… Gun and drug related crime has definitely increased. Until recently the possession of guns by criminals was very rare – now finding people with firearms is a daily occurrence here… most of the guns we seize are used in criminal activity, are held illegally, and are smuggled into Sweden."

“Malmo is infamous for explosions. Yet thankfully nobody has been killed by the explosions yet – some of them are just used to frighten people. We had one case in Rosengard where a group were given a court order to leave an apartment because they were a disturbance for the neighbours. And then suddenly hand grenades and explosions outside the office of the real estate company.

Elofsson explained trust was a major part of the problem – that migrant communities don’t trust the police, and native Swedes were losing trust in the government.

“You have people getting shot here, and when they get to hospital they refuse to give any details”.

It is the Swedes that define Sweden, and if the people living there change, so will the country. The places dominated by Arabs and Muslims are no longer part of the land of the Swedes; they are now part of Arab and Islamic civilization. If Swedes are replaced by Iraqis, then Sweden will cease to exist. Hopes that perhaps the second or third generation will become real Swedes after they familiarize themselves with native customs and are raised out of poverty are likewise dashed by reality. In the United Kingdom, those most likely to be Islamic terrorists were not poor, recent immigrants who simply hadn't had enough exposure to "our values"; they were wealthy Muslims who had been born and raised in the UK! How right was Kipling when speaking on the outsider he warned us that we cannot know "when the gods of his far-off land shall repossess his blood"! Race, religion and culture are not the exact same thing, but they are interlocked, and there has never been a successful attempt to fully extricate them.

The multiracial experiment has likewise failed in the United States. Have the Mexicans, who now outnumber Whites in California, turned the state of California into a haven of limited government and Constitutionalist principles, or have they recreated Mexico in California? The largest Hispanic organisation is called "La Raza", "The Race" in English translation. Does this organisation advocate for Anglo-Saxon ideals of liberty and freedom? Does the light of American civilization shine in the majority-Black city of Detroit, famous for it's dysfunction and violence? Does the NAACP, or Black Lives Matter stand for what you believe in, dear conservative? No! Mexico has been recreated in California, and Africa has been recreated in Baltimore, Detroit, and Atlanta! Why has Western civilization not been created here? Why, despite all the wealth transfer from you to them, and all your tolerance, patience, and guidance, have these places not become truly American? Why have 50 years of trying integrate Blacks gone up in flames in Ferguson and Baltimore? Why are schools in America [banning the wearing of the American flag on Cinco de Mayo]?

Again, let us ask: What is Western Civilization? If a land is defined by its people, as Denmark is by the Danes, then who is it that populates what we call "Western civilization"? What sort of people are they that populate Germany, England, America, Australia, Canada, and France, and make all these countries part of the same civilization, this "Western civilization"? Why is Australia part of this "Western civilization" if it is not in the Western hemisphere? Because it is of the same people as the rest of the civilization. And just who is this people?

Western civilization is White civilization! Just as there is no Arabia without the Arabs, and no Denmark without the Danes, there is no Western civilization for you to conserve, dear conservative, if there are no Westerners left! There is no other hand than the White hand that can carry this civilization on as anything more than a museum exhibit.

__________________

.

Individuals, businesses/corporations, governments at all levels, MUST borrow from banks in order to get money created.Byron Dale

"Money is created when loans are issued and debts incurred; money is extinguished when loans are re-paid."John B Henderson

Money that one uses to pay interest on a loan has been created somewhere else in the economy by another loan.John M Yetter

"Our national circulating medium [i.e. dollars] is at the mercy of loan transactions of banks, which lend, not money, but promises to supply money they do not possess."Irving Fisher

For almost 150 years the United States has been conducting an experiment. The subjects of the experiment: black people and working-class whites. The hypothesis to be tested: Can a people taken from the jungles of Africa and forced into slavery be fully integrated as citizens in a majority white population?

The whites were descendants of Europeans who had created a majestic civilization. The former slaves had been tribal peoples with no written language and virtually no intellectual achievements. Acting on a policy that was not fair to either group, the government released newly freed black people into a white society that saw them as inferiors. America has struggled with racial discord ever since.

Decade after decade the problems persisted but the experimenters never gave up. They insisted that if they could find the right formula the experiment would work, and concocted program after program to get the result they wanted. They created the Freedman’s Bureau, passed civil rights laws, tried to build the Great Society, declared War on Poverty, ordered race preferences, built housing projects, and tried midnight basketball. Their new laws intruded into people’s lives in ways that would have been otherwise unthinkable. They called in National Guard troops to enforce school integration. They outlawed freedom of association. Over the protests of parents, they put white children on buses and sent them to black schools and vice versa. They tried with money, special programs, relaxed standards, and endless handwringing to close the “achievement gap.” To keep white backlash in check they began punishing public and even private statements on race. They hung up Orwellian public banners that commanded whites to “Celebrate Diversity!” and “Say No To Racism.” Nothing was off limits if it might salvage the experiment.

Some thought that what W.E.B. Du Bois called the Talented Tenth would lead the way for black people. A group of elite, educated blacks would knock down doors of opportunity and show the world what blacks were capable of. There is a Talented Tenth. They are the black Americans who have become entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors and scientists. But ten percent is not enough. For the experiment to work, the ten percent has to be followed by a critical mass of people who can hold middle-class jobs and promote social stability. That is what is missing. Through the years, too many black people continue to show an inability to function and prosper in a culture unsuited to them.

Detroit is bankrupt, the south side of Chicago is a war zone, and majority-black cities all over America are beset by degeneracy and violence. And blacks never take responsibility for their failures. Instead, they lash out in anger and resentment. Across the generations and across the country, as we have seen in Detroit, Watts, Newark, Los Angeles, Cincinnati, and now Ferguson, rioting and looting are just one racial incident away.

The white elite would tell us that this doesn’t mean the experiment has failed. We just have to try harder. We need more money, more time, more understanding, more programs, more opportunities. But nothing changes no matter how much money is spent, no matter how many laws are passed, no matter how many black geniuses are portrayed on TV, and no matter who is president.

Some argue it’s a problem of “culture,” as if culture creates people’s behavior instead of the other way around. Others blame “white privilege.” But since 1965, when the elites opened America’s doors to the Third World, immigrants from Asia and India–people who are not white, not rich, and not “connected”–have quietly succeeded. While the children of these people are winning spelling bees and getting top scores on the SAT, black “youths” are committing half the country’s violent crime–crime, which includes viciously punching random white people on the street for the thrill of it, that has nothing to do with poverty.

The experiment has failed. Not because of culture, or white privilege, or racism. The fundamental problem is that white people and black people are different. They differ intellectually and temperamentally. These differences result in permanent social incompatibility.

Our rulers don’t seem to understand just how tired their white subjects are with this experiment. They don’t understand that white people aren’t out to get black people; they are just exhausted with them. They are exhausted by the social pathologies, the violence, the endless complaints, the blind racial solidarity, the bottomless pit of grievances, the excuses, the reflexive animosity. The elites explain everything with “racism,” and refuse to believe that white frustration could soon reach the boiling point.

They will be the only ones who are surprised when real revolution comes to the United States, and that it is white people who lead the revolt.[end]

vikingcelt here: Had to add this important comment about the above article (for the benefit of the White people reading this and understanding what we WN's want):

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Aha. That would explain these remarks:

Quote:

But since 1965, when the elites opened America’s doors to the Third World, immigrants from Asia and India–people who are not white, not rich, and not “connected”–have quietly succeeded. While the children of these people are winning spelling bees and getting top scores on the SAT, black “youths” are committing half the country’s violent crime–crime, which includes viciously punching random white people on the street for the thrill of it that has nothing to do with poverty.

Sorry, Jared (Taylor). It's not just about negroes. We don't want Narinda Shrebamalamadingdong or Lee Ho Fuk in our spelling bees. We want a WHITE nation of our own. Let these "talented" third worlders return home and improve their own countries and societies with their abilities.

No. Racial identity is taught through educational means and the receiver of said education can decide whether to accept it as truth. The idea of race as an identity is utterly operant. There is no proper evidence to suggest that people of other races come to a sense of racial identity, you may as well say that a cow comes to a sense of being a friesian cow as opposed to an aberdeen angus early in its life. It learns what it is simply by being. I am a cow, i eat grass, beyond that, what does it matter? Everyone has the right to think what they want to think and believe what they want to believe but care has to be exercised when approaching the border between free thought and operant conditioning and reconditioning whether purposefully or by chance. "Whites" aren't denied identity by anyone, identity is found through being, by having actions and thoughts, through the examining and evaluation of external mental stimuli and the reactions and ideas brought about thusly. We live because we live, we exist because we know nothing elde. So if a person is taught racial identity and chooses to believe in it, then so be it, but this paragraph is nothing but hateful, speculative bile.

I don't see anything hateful about the previous quote. I agree that they do come to understand their identity early. Black kids are constantly told they are Black, modeled to what "being Black" means, etc. They are actually forbidden to act in ways that are not consistent with the understanding of the parents' and peers. While there is "education" involved, it is never formal. The "education," or indoctrination, starts on the day one is born.

Whites on the other hand tend to not have a culture that puts as much emphasis on that, and every thing we do is the "normal way," not some group's way. So it is like recognizing oneself as Black is a hateful layer that is added on top of someone who could otherwise become a good person. While taking on Black culture or another minority's culture is encouraged, Whites are not encouraged to have one. There seems to be a double standard in society, where Whites having a culture is seen as abusive and threatening, but it not be seen that way for others.

I tend to believe that the person rebutting won't be on the site for long. Finding something reasonable to be "hateful bile" as a means of acting out one's own hatred against a group that is reasonably defending itself does not come across as an action of someone on our side.

Now, things could work if all the current unfit Blacks were somehow culled and all media promoting IR romance and Black militancy were destroyed. However, that seems too insurmountable of a task. If culling were an option, I'd start with the prisons, homeless shelters, all the violent cities, and give the government permission to use ordinance to suppress riots. And someone tried something similar once, but didn't extend the scope far enough.

Even in ancient wars, the men would only kill the problematic men for the most part, but would claim the women. Without the original men, the culture changed immediately and dramatically.

See, Whites have had a culling process over time. The ones who came to America initially came here mostly due to their religious convictions. Then there was bitter winters, famine, and hardships, so only those with the most physical and mental rigor survived. As we established law and order, the most violent of Whites were executed. Executions for bad deeds can be a double deterrent. First it puts those who are on the edge on notice. Secondly, if it is genetic, then if someone is put to death, their relatives might become more emboldened to commit bad acts of their own (due to resentment of losing their own), and thus they also meet a similar fate.

Australia has a different history. It was mostly exiled British prisoners. Again, they were forced to either step up to the challenge of founding a new nation or to die trying. The ones who didn't kill each other or succumb to the elements lived to reproduce, and likely, within a couple of generations of law and order being established, the most violent were eliminated.

There was a time when White adulterers were executed too. That eliminated those who couldn't control their passions. But no non-White civilization has been subjected to such within the past several hundred years.

Even non-Whites who come to America by choice, even some from mostly Black nations, they tend to have much better culture and values. There seem to be a couple of reasons for this, in my opinion. First, remember how America got its slaves. They slaves were mostly criminals (rapists and murderers) who deserved execution but were sold as slaves instead. So if criminality has a genetic basis, that is what we brought here. Plus there was the selection process. The masters wanted the strongest, biggest, and most efficient, and they wanted those who had little capacity to be self-led or think for themselves. Those are good traits for slaves or prisoners, but, but not for anyone in the free world. Then back to the recent but civilized immigrants, there is also the cultural differences. They chose to be here, they understood the hardships of moving to a new place, had compelling reasons to come here, and were not filled with an entitlement mentality nor any anti-White hate propaganda. So in a sense, they faced the same molding process of the early Americans and have more in common with White Americans than African-Americans.

My point is that any race can be improved if the unfit people are culled over time and not allowed to reproduce. It is both genetic and cultural. However, in fixing the culture, that has to come from whatever people themselves. If you impose your culture onto them, they will resent it, except in rare situations, like White leaders pushing the best of American culture in Japan. That happened as a part of war reparations. We brought them shortcuts to jump start them back to success. In a number of ways, we lifted them to a higher standard than they had before WWII. So the people have to reach a point where they accept a better culture.

Sukant Chandan is just one of many speakers and so called 'Political Analysts' with a major dog in the fight over Europe's future. He and many like him who were born or brought to the UK and Europe want nothing more than the complete and total destruction of both Western Civilization and the concept of 'Whiteness' while seeking to empower themselves and other Non-White groups. While some may argue over what 'Whiteness' is, it does not matter. If you are European, you are White. When Bosnian immigrant Zemir Begic was beaten to death with hammers in St.Louis, USA, his black killers allegedly chanted "Kill the Whites". It didn't matter that Zemir was Bosnian, it didn't matter that he might have even been Muslim. He was White and he was the enemy. Much of the language among these growing networks and groups is the depiction of 'Whiteness' as the enemy. They may cover up their motives with poorly hidden self-victimizing language such as 'White Supremacy' but rest assured, if you're European, you're the enemy. If you oppose the mass third world migration which will engulf Europe then they will call you a bigot, a fascist and a racist Nazi. The consequences don't matter, even if you understand that this migration will erase culture, wipe out age old communities, massively increase rape and other violent crime while compressing wages, reduce housing and put unsustainable pressures on welfare institutions on the native budget. You are their enemy. The social deterioration caused by this migration which has been mounting since the 1960s is incalculable and this latest wave is the final push into an area of no return. The London riots were a direct result of the mass deprivation caused by a radical change in its ethnic make up. Such change forced over 600,000 (Equivalent to a city the size of Glasgow) whites to leave the city in under 10 years. What people like Chandan and the Establishment are doing is forcing a choice in which there is no room for neutrality. There is no place for watching from the sidelines as this will affect you no matter what you do.

The choice is either the survival of Europe and its many unique ethnicities and cultures, or its complete destruction as these unique groups become minorities within their own ancient, native homelands. As Chandan says, the goal is to 'take back everything they took from us, and more on top." This is not a benevolent mass seeking to naturalize and adapt. This is not for the benefit of Europeans or the nations of the European diaspora. It is nothing less than an invasion. Never in all of European history have this many Non-Europeans crossed into Europe. Not by immigration, nor by armies. Chandan and others like him even have the nerve to claim this will 'Liberate' whites in Europe. They claim that much of the status and 'rights' that white working class peoples have today can be attributed to the ideological efforts of black civil rights actors and other non-white third world 'activists'. This couldn't be further from the truth. If this were true, then the Global South that Chandan so readily calls our liberators would have the same liberties the West has, yet it doesn't and shows no signs of ever having them. All European workers won their demands for better pay, conditions and status in their own fights without the aid both ideological or economic from the so called 'Global South'. Such struggles occurred over many hundreds of years, even before colonialism.

Many arguments justifying mass immigration - which the public has opposed by a super majority for decades - include myths that immigration saved the NHS or that they do the jobs that British people don't want to do. The reality is that many companies simply don't pay enough and lobby for immigration to lower the wages of low skilled workers. Even skilled workers have to deal with companies lobbying for foreign skilled workers as they don't want to train people and demand unpaid apprenticeships. Immigration has harmed the struggle for workers to receive better pay and conditions and this was arguably by design. The argument also doesn't hold water as most no-white immigrants have double the unemployment rates of whites and studies have show that non European immigration harms the UK economy due to costs off these arrivals far outweighing their benefits in tax. Finally, the NHS was not saved by foreign immigration. The UK government could have simply subsidized the education of people seeking to work in the NHS and paid them better. Today the Conservative government stripped away the last loans for people seeking to become nurses. It was already a pitiful loan system but without this last vestige of native education, the NHS will certainly depend more on foreign immigration. This is by design. Neither major parties in the UK seek to curb immigration despite disapproval by the super majority and despite it being the biggest issue for British voters.

Ironically, the very first Nationalized Healthcare system that Chandan supports was created by the very people he claims to oppose the most; Fascists. The first National Healthcare System was built by the National Socialists in Germany in the 1930s. It was also Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Union of Fascists who put social housing at the forefront of government policy, with Labour leaders mimicking his various speeches on the issue decades later. Much of the better conditions and individual freedoms of workers was won by themselves, not by third world migration or non-white activism.

Furthermore, Chandans claims of Europe owing the rest of the world reparations for "500 years of theft" ignoring the previous 700 years of economic theft of Europeans by Middle Eastern Muslims and Central Asians. Over a million Europeans were enslaved by Muslims over 1300 years until such piracy and slaving was ended by the nation he claims is the hotbed of 'White Supremacy'. It was the British, the so called 'heart of whiteness' today that ended global slavery. It was Europeans that brought about the industrial age. It was Europeans who over the past centuries had introduced most of the modern inventions of our era and before. If Europeans were so horrific and so barbaric and decrepit, why do so many continue to pour into Europe? Why does Chandan and others like him remain in Europe? If their own cultures, concepts and peoples are so morally and ideologically superior, why do they not return to their homelands which they have an obvious intrinsic tribal bias towards?

We don't need to answer that. We all know the answer and they know it too. What you have, Europa, is something everyone else wants. Who you are, is what everyone else envies. All civilizations have conquered, there is not a single piece of land on this Earth today that was not conquered by someone else. Chandan himself is Punjab and demands British reparations for India, but will he pay reparations to the Southern Indian Australoids that his North Western Indian peoples have dominated for 2000 years under a racial caste system? No.

You, Europa, conquered the world even while fighting among yourselves. You built the modern world. All peoples have conquered but you conquered best and now it is you who are to be conquered. But not just conquered, you are to be colonized. There wont be foreign monarchs and lords ruling over you from afar as you go about your day, doing what you have always done. No, you will be replaced and every institution of government, every media organization and every major capitalist corporate entity will plot your total destruction. They will teach the youth that your group deserves to suffer, that it deserves to be stripped of its earnings from work as you are a privileged class that needs to be squeezed for the 'crimes' of your ancestors. It doesn't matter how poor you are, or how bad your conditions are, you are the privileged class, you are white and you are the enemy.

As you become a minority, your agency will drip away, your issues will become less meaningful and your suffering will be ignored. What is happening in South Africa today, is what will happen to you on a global scale. You will be murdered, raped and beaten, one by one, slowly over time as your numbers fall due to your low birth rates and your constant hyper-individualist identity which refuses to see the rampant racial tribalism around you that unifies against you. The State and media will cover it up and anyone that disagrees will be labeled a racist or imprisoned. Even when you are a minority, you will still be blamed for inevitable failures of a dysfunctional state and its multi racial, multi cultural chaos. You will become hunted nomads, without a fatherland, without roots and without future. That is what Chandan offers. That is your 'Liberation'.

Your only other choice is to fight for what is yours. And you can do it, you are the majority and within you are the same cultures, genetics and seeds which allowed you to conquer the world in the first place. All you have to do is choose Europa, take action and defend what is rightfully yours. You have moral authority. You are the one who is attacked. It is your interests that are most at stake. You have every right to demand survival and dictate future. It is your cities that will be lost, your culture trampled, your family that will suffer. No one has moral authority over you. You, Europa, are a cornered wolf and you still have the sharpest fangs. It's time to use them.

The choice is yours. There is "No Middle Ground." There is only Europa or Replacement. You decide.

I'm a WHITE mother of 5 WHITE children and I cannot believe what my family must endure EVERY SINGLE DAY and how society is misleading my children into thinking that what I have taught them regarding other races is uneducated hate and should not be condoned or agreed with my son was even pushed into dating a black girl by black guys accusing him of being gay ( my husband and I dealt with that one quickly and aggressively)!!!!!! I never needed to be taught to disapprove of other races the other races made sure of that all on their own and continue to do so EVERY SINGLE DAY ! My first encounter with outright racism was at the Southern Baptist church I grew up in which should have been a place I could feel safe but became a place I feared. The church I grew up in consisted of mostly white middle age and senior citizen members along with a small youth group and had a comfortable family atmosphere. When I was around 9 a black man began to attend and in a short time became a member and everyone (except my grandma) loved the guy so when the guy suggested (more like insisted ) the church begin to pick up children from the poorer surrounding areas (black children) the church agreed. The children that the black man had the church pick up and bring in were disrespectful , destructive and worse of all HATED WHITE PEOPLE so its safe to say that was the beginning of the end of our happy church family(NO white people attend anymore). That year is when I learned the reality of the race situation because those black children took a special interest in torturing me ! On one particularly horrible church visit the black children beat on me and pushed me down a flight of stairs and I had enough so I knocked the holy **** out of the biggest one then I went to the adult who was in charge that night (none other then the black man who caused the problem to begin with) and told him what happened and he comforted me telling me they would be punished then he proceeded to take me to my grandma . What happened when we found my grandma was worse than all the torment put together that those black kids put me through ! The black man told my grandmother with me standing right there that I was making racist comments along with derogatory remarks about people who live in poverty which word for word was a complete lie invented by that black man to attempt to justify the behavior of those black children ! Thank God my grandmother didn't not fall for that man's lies and while standing there speaking to him she noticed bruising on me so I showed her my back which even had a full hand print bruise least to say that black man didn't having anything else to say at that point. From that point on I NEVER backed down again ! On a separate occasion I went to a carry out after school and a white girl I knew came running up to me while I was in the check out begging for help because several blacks were trying to jump her so I walked out with her and since we were so out numbered we hopped in a friends car and went to his nearby apartment . Not long after we got to the apartment 15 + blacks showed up some of which prior to that day had engaged me in friendly conversation in classes at school and when I asked what the problem was they started cursing at me so I went inside. After I went inside they then began breaking the door down so while the girl they were after ran and hid I grabbed a can of pepper spray then threw the door open stepped out on the porch with the pepper spray behind my back and I again asked what the problem was ,of coarse by then I was furious so when one of them called me a bitch I said "YES I AM " then I unloaded the entire can of pepper spray in every single one of their eyes and sent them on their way crying. I found out a long time ago all you have to do to piss off blacks is be white ! These days my children are the ones out there being attacked for no other reason then being white . We moved to a small town to be around our own kind WHITE people but unfortunately my husband's job transferred him to the city so we had to move to the city and my son was the only white kid in 8th grade . My daughters who are in elementary school have a black racist principle who would allow the black kids to beat up and bully white kids but suspended white kids if they fight back so I collected evidence including voicemails from the principle herself to file a grievance and when I went to the school administration to file the grievance I was floored NOT EVEN ONE white person worked there so I'm sure anyone who reads this already knows the outcome . If a person from any other race had kids going through what my kids are going through and their parents have the proof I have they would be rich from a lawsuit but since we are white we are expected to just get over it but what kind of parent can just get over their kids coming home with bruises and crying every day. We can't afford to move and if we keep our kids home from school when they have black eyes or just to upset to go we are threatened with child services .....................

I'm very sorry about that ma'am, hopefully things improve, I'm a young guy, was beaten many times at school by Hispanics and blacks. The irony was the school was rub by self_hating white liberals, that see no value in white youth, only a fanatical fervor to discriminate.

I’d like to thank Will Reilly for inviting me to speak to you today. I used to get a lot of invitations to speak on college campuses, but they are now very rare. At least on majority-white campuses, there is an abject terror of speakers who might offend someone. You can’t speak honestly about race without offending people, so what this means is that the truth about race is almost never spoken on most American campuses.

The subject of this debate is whether diversity is a strength for the United States. As you know, from President Obama on down, all you ever hear is people telling you that racial diversity is a strength. Not just a strength, but maybe even our country’s greatest strength.

They’re wrong. Racial diversity is not a strength. It is a grinding, permanent source of conflict and tension, not just in the United States but everywhere in the world where there is racial diversity.

Racial diversity means the presence of more than one race. So let’s imagine, just for a moment, how the history of the United States would have been different without the racial diversity that resulted from bringing blacks here. What would American history be like with no blacks? There would never have been slavery. There would never have been the American civil war–which killed more Americans than all our other wars combined. There would have been no Jim Crow, no segregated schools, no civil rights movement, no busing, no race riots.

And it makes no difference if you want to put 100 percent of the blame for all these things on white people. The fact remains that the historical balance sheet for black/white racial diversity in the United States is hugely, crushingly negative. If you remove black/white racial diversity, you remove slavery, our most deadly war, and our most murderous civil disturbances. The very worst parts of our history vanish. How can something that brought about all that horror be a strength? I would be the winner in this debate if I sat down right now.

But let’s move to the present. I’m sure you have followed the racial demonstrations on college campuses, such as Yale and Princeton and University of Missouri. There would be none of this commotion without racial diversity. Do you think all that screaming and demonstrating is a strength? Does it help people study? No, it is tension, it is conflict.

What’s more, these campus disturbances also show just how differently black and white people see the world. Black students at Yale were complaining about “entrenched white supremacy” at Yale.

“Entrenched white supremacy.” First of all, if Yale were a bastion of white supremacy, there’d be no black students there at all. But were the whites students burning crosses and lynching the black students? Were they attacking black students? Were they at least calling them rude names? No. Not a hint of any of that. Blacks were furious because a professor sent an e-mail message saying that it wasn’t Yale’s job to tell students what Halloween costumes they shouldn’t wear. She said if somebody’s costume offends you, maybe you should just tell him.

That’s white supremacy? Black students on an Ivy League campus must be the most coddled, pampered black people in the history of the world, and if they really believe they are fighting entrenched white supremacy they are living in a completely different world from white people.

And what about the Black Lives Matter movement? Is this a strength for the country? Gangs of people marching around yelling, stopping traffic, shutting down politicians’ speeches. Is this a strength? Even if you think all the shouting is justified, it’s a sign of conflict, fury, and tension. Without racial diversity, we wouldn’t have any of it.

And again, whites and blacks have a completely different view of reality. Where did the Black Lives Matter movement really take off? In Ferguson, after a white policeman shot Michael Brown. When the officer who shot Brown was not indicted, 64 percent of whites thought that was the right decision. Only 4 percent of blacks thought so. This is a huge difference. It was the very same event, but blacks and white saw it completely differently.

Now, to win this debate, I don’t have to convince you that white people were right and black people were wrong. My job is much easier. All I have to do is point out to you that blacks and whites look at exactly the same thing and see something completely different, and for you to realize that that is not a strength. To have people so divided by race that they don’t even see the same things means perpetual, agonizing conflict.

Racial diversity also turns everything into a racial turf battle. Are the Oscar nominees too white? Should the next Supreme Court justice be an Asian? Don’t we need more black policemen? Are there enough Hispanic programmers in Silicon Valley?

You can’t just say, “I hired the best programmers for my business and they were all white guys and Asians.” Nope, in this country if you hire by pure ability alone you can get sued. That’s the kind of thing racial diversity does for you.

Let’s look at this from a different angle. If racial diversity is America’s greatest strength, it must be a truly wonderful thing. It’s better than having a country the size of a continent with beautiful harbors on two oceans. It’s better than having the most productive farmland in the world and huge reserves of natural resources. It must be something so fantastic that every man woman and child in the America wakes up in the morning and says to himself, “How can I get more of this wonderful stuff?”

Is that how people live their lives? No. Are you dying to go to school with Hispanics? Do you yearn for roommates and neighbors who speak Chinese? I suspect you don’t. People like being around people like themselves.

Only white people are confused about this. In 2010, Brown University–a big, Ivy League university–did a study about housing segregation. John Logan is the professor who was the lead researcher. He found, and I quote,

Among minority households, even those with relatively high incomes tend to be clustered in neighborhoods where most of their neighbors are the same race. . . . Race trumps income.

In other words, black people who could afford to buy houses in a white neighborhood bought houses in black neighborhoods instead. Prof. John Logan thinks this is terrible. He’s got a theory about how real estate agents are somehow tricking black people into buying houses in black neighborhoods.

I feel like telling him, “John, darling, there are black people with money who want to live with other black people. Believe it or not, not every black person wants you as a neighbor.” This is a concept he can’t seem to grasp.

The other day I was reading an article about housing segregation in California. That state is a real stew, of course, with people from everywhere. The article was one long moan about how in Los Angeles it’s not just neighborhoods that are segregated, but there are apartment buildings completely segregated by nationality. In some buildings, every single tenant is Korean. In some buildings they’re all Salvadoran.

The writer of the article–another goofy white person–thinks this is scandalous. It’s not scandalous at all. Those people chose to live with each other. They like it that way. Because diversity isn’t a strength.

If you want to understand race in America, just go to church. That’s right. Church. What you will find is that nearly 95 percent of churches have congregations that are at least 80 percent one race. Lots of them are 100 percent one race. There are even about 4,000 Asian congregations in the United States.

You are free to go any church you want. No church is going to bar the door to you or run you off. But when people are completely free to choose, they go where they are comfortable, where they can be like people like themselves. They don’t go looking for diversity.

People want to live, work, socialize, and go to church with their own tribe. A survey of Californians conducted at UC Berkeley found that majorities of whites, Hispanics, blacks, and Asians agreed with the statement that “people are happier when segregated.” [i]

Again, California is a mishmash, with people from all over the world. Hispanics, especially, have been moving into South Central Los Angeles, which used to be black. Here’s what the president of one black home-owners association said about Hispanics:

It’s a different culture, a different breed of people. They don’t have the same values. You can’t get together with them. It’s like mixing oil and water. [ii]

Here is what one black person told The Philadelphia Inquirer some years ago:

We don’t want whites living in our neighborhoods. We don’t want our children going to school with theirs. We don’t want our daughters and sons marrying their sons and daughters. No thanks . . . .

So why have I been talking about segregation? Because it’s about how people really live, not about what they say. It shows what they truly think about racial diversity. They don’t like it and they run away from it.

Now, don’t get me wrong. If some people want to mix it up, God bless them. After I’ve finished talking, someone in the audience–probably a white person–is going to get up and say, “I love my black friends and my Mexican friends, and my Chinese friends.” And, to that I say, “I couldn’t be happier for you.” You go out there and you love them for all you’re worth. Just don’t pretend that you’re somehow better than the vast majority of people who prefer to be around folks like themselves.

And what happens when people who don’t want to be together are forced together. The classic example of that was busing of school students during the 1970s. What happened when black children were bussed across town to schools that were all white? The whites cleared out. In Baltimore, when busing started, nine high schools went from being 100 percent white to 100 percent black in just seven years. From white to black overnight.

The white people of Baltimore sure didn’t think racial diversity was a strength. It was the same all over the country. White people left the public schools.

At some of the biggest public school districts in the country, you have to pull out your binoculars to find a white student. In all of Dallas, Texas, only 4.6 percent of the students are white. In Los Angeles, 8.7 percent; in Houston ,7.8 percent; in Detroit, 2.6 percent.

Any white child who wanted a bracing dose of diversity–America’s greatest strength–could sure get it by enrolling in Chicago or Miami public schools. Isn’t it odd? They don’t.

So the whites ran away, but in many schools there is still diversity because blacks and Hispanics stayed behind. And you know what happens? Riots. Los Angeles, for example, has a long history of black and Hispanic students fighting each other. They’ve done it over and over. Just last November, at Hawthorne High School in LA, there was a race riot involving 300 students. Thirty students were suspended or expelled. But this stuff is just local news.

And it’s not just Los Angeles. In high schools all around the country, there have been riots of blacks vs. Hispanics, blacks vs. Arabs, whites vs. Hispanics, Hispanics vs. American Indians, blacks vs. Asians. Just about every mix you can imagine.

Did you know that a number of schools in California have banned the American flag? That’s right, an American flag stirs up Hispanics to the point they might riot. Diversity can turn even Old Glory into the equivalent of gang colors.

You want to hear the saddest story ever about school diversity? In 2010, the graduation ceremony of the Puesta del Sol Elementary School in Victorville, California, had to be called off because of a riot between black and Hispanic parents. Police locked down the school and made arrests. [iii] This is the graduation ceremony of an elementary school. I guess diversity didn’t turn out to be such a strength.

So, the government integrated the schools and we get white flight and riots. When there aren’t riots, the students of different races generally keep to themselves. They self-segregate.

But there is a different kind of institution the government has integrated even more intrusively, and that’s prisons.

And the result? Race riots. I could give you a great long list of prison race riots in which people have been killed, maimed, slashed, beaten unconscious. That’s why people of every race stick together for protection. A man who served four years in a California prison wrote an article for the Los Angeles Times about life in prison. He wrote about what he called the Number 1 Rule for Survival, “The races and ethnic groups stick together. There is no other rule.”

Here’s another white guy writing about what it’s like to do time in Texas.

[B]ecause of my prison experience, I can’t stand being in the presence of blacks. I can’t even listen to my old, favorite Motown music anymore. . . .

The he goes on to say:

[I]n the aftermath of the Byrd murder [the black guy who was dragged to death in Jasper, Texas] I read one commentator’s opinion in which he expressed disappointment that ex-cons could come out of prison with unresolved racial problems despite the racial integration of the prisons. Despite? Buddy, I have news for you! How about because of racial integration? [iv]

You know what the number-one demand in prisons is? Segregation. Forced integration means that people are going to die. But no, we can’t do the humane thing and separate prisoners because we have this baloney theory about diversity being a strength. Tell that to the guys who ended up dead or with 40 stitches because of diversity.

And, by the way, when there are riots in schools and prisons, it’s always about race. You will never hear about the liberals and conservatives trying to kill each other. Or the Baptists and Methodists. The problem is race.

So let’s take a look at the work place. That’s a completely different picture, right? There are loads of big companies that claim “diversity is job number one.” Diversity is great for the profits, right?

More baloney.

Thomas A. Kochan, a professor at MIT has probably researched corporate diversity more thoroughly than anyone. The first thing he did was contact 20 major companies that brag about their diversity, and asked them to tell him what diversity had done for them. He was astonished to learn that not one company had done a study on how diversity might have increased profits or improved operations. They had nothing to show him.

After five years of studying corporate diversity, he found that the more diversity there was, the more conflict and tension there was, and the more likely people were to quit. His conclusion: “The diversity industry is built on sand.”

People who praise diversity like to point to a 2007 book by Scott Page of the University of Michigan. The book is called The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Sounds great. Finally, here’s proof of the strength of diversity, right? No. Scott Page is writing about the importance of different points of view and problem-solving techniques. When it comes to racial diversity, he writes this:

Lots of strange things can happen in a diverse group that would not be likely to happen among homogeneous people–including physical and verbal violence. . . . [v] The more different we are the less we agree. . . . [vi] Group dynamics can create no end of problems. People prefer to hang with people like themselves. [vii]

This is just common sense. In fact, a large-scale survey called the National Study of the Changing Workforce found that more than half of all workers said they preferred to work with people who were not only of the same race, but also the same sex and same level of education. [viii]

You have all heard of diversity training and diversity management. It’s a $10 billion-a-year industry. But think about it. Why does the country have to spend $10 billion a year trying to manage something that is supposed to be wonderful? You don’t have to pay someone to teach you how to benefit from things that are genuinely good. Do you need a consultant to tell you how to deal with more vacation time, or good weather, or cheaper gasoline, or free beer? No. The good things in life take care of themselves.

There are diversity managers because diversity is a mess and a problem and a bother, and people are going crazy just trying to deal with it.

So, just how much of a mess and problem?

It would be impossible to count up every single strain and confrontation and insult that comes from racial diversity. But we have a few indications, and that is the number of formal racial grievances filed by Americans. Now, things have to get pretty bad for someone to file a formal grievance. And for every formal grievance, there must be many, many more racial problems that people either just put up with, or walk away from.

So how many grievances are there? In 2015, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the EEOC, heard 31,027 cases of racial discrimination, 9,438 cases of National Origins discrimination, and 2,833 cases of color discrimination. That comes to a total of 43,298 cases–brand new cases–all filed in 2015. That’s a typical year.

In addition, about 9,000 cases are filed in federal court every year.

But that’s just the feds. The states have their own systems. In 2014, California dealt with 10,559 brand new race discrimination cases. And that’s just one state. Every branch of the military has a grievance procedure. Every major university. Big companies do, too. If you counted up every federal, state, local, military, and civilian racial grievance filed in a single year, how many would you get? 100,000? 500,000? I don’t even know. I’m not sure anyone has ever counted them all up.

My point is, every one of these cases represents agony, heartache, resentment. Think of all the time and money that went into filing these cases, processing them, deciding them, enforcing them. It must cost the country billions of dollars every year, over and above the heartache and agony.

And on top of that there are the diversity bureaucracies in businesses, affirmative action coordinators in universities, diversity specialists in the military–we have this huge, clanking, wheezing, groaning machine chewing up enormous resources, just trying to sort through the endless problems of what is supposed to be a strength.

In a country without racial diversity, you wouldn’t need any of that. It’d be gone overnight.

In their own sheepish way, a few scholars have tumbled to the obvious about diversity. Have any of you heard of Robert Putnam of Harvard? He studied 41 different communities in the US that ranged from very homogeneous rural South Dakota to super-mixed-up Los Angeles. And what he found was that the more diversity there is, the less people trust each other. Well, Robert Putnam is a typical confused white man, and he just couldn’t believe what he found. He analyzed his data every possible way to find some reason other than diversity to explain why people in Los Angeles don’t trust each other. He couldn’t find one.

This was terrible for him, because he wanted to believe that diversity is a strength. So he just sat on his research for five years, and finally published it only because some of his findings leaked out.

So what did Robert Putnam found out? Diversity leads to:

* A lower expectation that people will cooperate to solve problems.

* Less voluntarism and less charitable giving.

* Fewer friends and more unhappiness.

* A lower likelihood to bother to register to vote.

* Less confidence in local government, local leaders, and local media. [ix]

* A lot more television watching.

When you haven’t got friends and you don’t trust people you watch a lot of TV.

So, there it is, straight from Harvard: Diversity destroys trust.

Another study run by MIT and Tufts University summarized 15 different investigations of the impact of diversity on trust. The conclusion every time was: more diversity, less trust. [x]*

By the way, there is a field of study called “happiness research” that analyzes what makes people happy. Prof. Michael Hagerty of UC Davis has surveyed decades of international happiness research and found that “for the most part, the top-rated countries are small and homogeneous.” He went on to explain that “they have a similar world view and a similar religion, so that it’s easier for them to communicate and to understand each other’s motives. And they don’t have race problems.” [xi]

Once again, here is the voice of research. Diversity destroys trust. Homogeneity makes you happy.

I’d like to close with some poll results. A 2007 poll asked non-whites whether racial tension is either a “very important problem,” “somewhat important,” or not a problem. No less than 93 percent of Hispanics thought it was very or somewhat important (79 percent said “very important”), 92 percent of blacks thought it was very or somewhat important (65 percent said “very important”), and 73 percent of Asians thought racial tension was very or somewhat important problem for the country (37 percent said “very important”).

This is racial tension we’re talking about.

The day after Mr. Obama was elected, a Gallup poll found that 70 percent of Americans thought his election would improve race relations.

Well, six years later, a Bloomberg Poll found that 56 percent of whites and 45 percent of blacks thought race relations got worse under Obama.

A Wall Street Journal/CBS poll last year found that 63 percent of Americans think race relations are bad, and only 33 percent think they are good. These are the worst figures in 20 years.

Just this year, Rasmussen reports found that 50 percent of Americans think race relations are getting worse.

Bad and getting worse. Americans aren’t stupid. They just have to open their eyes to see that racial diversity is not a strength. Race has been a problem in this country from the start. We’ve been chewing on this bone for hundreds of years. And we still have race riots, for heaven’s sake, like the ones we just had in Ferguson and Baltimore.

Why can’t we get it right?

For the same reason that nobody, anywhere can get it right. Race is a fundamental dividing line. Show me a multi-racial society, and I’ll show you conflict.

Now, I’ve told you about the problems you get when you have racial diversity that you would never have had without it. For Prof. Reilly to win this debate, he’s got to show you benefits that you would never have without diversity. And those benefits have to be so wonderful and so numerous that they not only make up for all the agony I have been describing, but they have to leave us way ahead because of diversity.

Debate

And for diversity to be a strength, it can’t be that diverse people lived together and refrained from killing each other. And it can’t be that they lived together and got along reasonably well. That’s not good enough. For diversity to be a strength, Prof. Reilly has got to come up with an impressive list of accomplishments, achievements, wonders that would have been impossible in a homogeneous, all-white America. So please listen very carefully and see if he does.

We have race problems in this country. Nobody would deny that. And we’re not going to solve them by repeating slogans that just aren’t true. We’ve got to dump this cuckoo fantasy about racial diversity being a strength. Only the truth will solve our problems, and the truth is that racial diversity is a terrible weakness.

I'm here though Canadian. our cities are changing. We have way too many Arabs (Saudis / Muslims) here now and Mexicans as well. Which were literally non-existent in the past 5 years. It's not what it use to be

In the past 50-60 years, ever since blacks integrated with whites in public schools, Blacks and most Mestizos have consistently scored lower in educational tests compared to Whites and East Asians. Many educational leaders are at loss to explain why those two minority groups don't do as well as Whites and Orientals. They keep muttering that we gotta spend tons of moola on minorities. They did with lots of government programs in the beginning, such as "Head Start", etc. That didn't work, as blacks and mestizos score gap was still there. Educators responded by throwing even more money, and eventually came up with lowering of standards and other gimmicks such as "No Child Left Behind" laws, etc. Guess what? That didn't work either, as recent SAT scores in the news still reflects that persistent gap between Blacks/Mestizos & Whites/East Asians.

(Good understanding of Math is very important in order for a society to advance technologically.)

Isn't it the time to think outside the box, and ponder the big reason for such persistent gap? Vast majority of teachers know each child is an individual and different from one another. Some learn faster than others, some have different skills and talents and interests. Maybe they ought consider the genetics and anatomy of the brain. Dr. Philippe Rushton did a massive study of all races. His studies can be shown here: Race, Evolution, and Behavior:

He clearly points out the different brain sizes and number of neurons between three major races - Blacks, Whites, East Asians. Has it occurred to educators that there is a link between IQ and the general brain sizes and number of neurons?

Chart 1 in the above link clearly show the number of cortical neurons (in Millions) for the three races as follows:

Blacks – 13,185 M, Whites – 13,665 M, East Asians – 13,767 M

Many brain/anatomy scientists has pointed out that many blacks in general have sloping foreheads, hence they lack the frontal lobes that most whites and orientals have. Isn't it a big clue which help explain the persistent low scores of the blacks?

Many educators have bought the very beautiful (and sounds and feels good) theory that environment influences education. They have ignored the genetics and anatomy aspect. Unfortunately, studies after studies don't reflect it. We cite the famous studies on twins who have been separated and raised in different environments. In almost all cases, such twins raised in different environments show very similar IQ, thus proving genetics influences IQ much more than environment. Isn't about time to ditch that "environment influences IQ" theory? The fact that blacks and mestizos score consistently lower despite better educational environment in the past few decades reflects the fatal flaws of that theory (more about it below).

It's time to open your eyes and connect the dots between physical brain anatomy / sizes and IQ.

I also want to point out that Black Africa remains the poorest section of the earth, as reflected by this image – note the well-lighted parts that reflects prosperity (hmmm, another reason why Africa is called as 'Dark Continent'):

As I previously noted, there have been strenuous efforts to improve education of the so-called minorities, with the blacks and mestizos as the main targets, since most Asian-Americans do well in schools.

A friend pointed out the problem isn't quality of American schools – as they're even better than most schools in other parts of the globe – yes, better than whiter schools of Europe – but the quality of the students. He writes:

If I may politely disagree, the failure of American education cannot be attributed to bad schools, but bad students.

In his insightful analysis of 2009 PISA scores (see PISA Scores Show Demography Is Destiny In Education Too ) , Steve Sailer showed that every racial group in the United States (whites, blacks, Hispanics, Asians) scored better than their racial brethren (Europeans, Africans, mestizos, Asians):

In other words, American schools are much better than foreign schools. U.S. schools are not the source of the problem, since they allow every child to reach his/her genetic potential in terms of educational attainment.

In Sailer’s words:

“Asian Americans outscored every Asian country, and lost out only to the city of Shanghai, China's financial capital.

White Americans students outperformed the national average in every one of the 37 historically white countries tested, except Finland (which is, perhaps not coincidentally, an immigration restrictionist nation where whites make up about 99 percent of the population).

Hispanic Americans beat all eight Latin American countries." ( My friend's comment: Please note that in Mexico only 25% of students graduate from high school. Hispanics living in the U.S. are doing much better, since U.S. schools do all they can to get the most out of these Latinos.)

"African Americans would likely have outscored any sub-Saharan country, if any had bothered to compete. The closest thing to a black country out of PISA's 65 participants is the fairly prosperous oil-refining Caribbean country of Trinidad and Tobago, which is roughly evenly divided between blacks and South Asians. African Americans outscored Trinidadians by 25 points.”

You can see the ranking of countries in Sailer’s first chart (2009 PISA Reading Scores). Please note that the second chart (American PISA Scores) shows that in 2003 and 2006 white Americans outscored every other group, including Asians, in math and science, respectively.

So what’s the reason for the overall decline in U.S. ranking year after year? The answer: browning of the student population.

In 1960s, whites comprised, let’s say, 80% of the student body, Hispanics 5%, blacks 15%. The weighted average was heavily influenced by high white scores and, consequently, the aggregate U.S. score was high as well.

Today, less than 60% of student population is white, thus low test scores of non-whites drag down the average—ever more so each year, as they grow in numbers.

In 2011, only 49.8% of U.S. newborns were white. Obviously, when these 15 year olds get tested in 2026, relative U.S. standing in international testing will be much lower than it was in 2009.

In other words, U.S. ranking in PISA competition will inevitably sink ever lower no matter what we do (shovel more money, fire all teachers and employ rocket scientists instead, improve the curriculum, impose discipline, disband teacher unions, privatize schools, open charter schools etc.) because blacks and browns have lower intellectual capacity, yet comprise ever larger percentage of the student body.

These kids obviously cannot overcome their genetic limitations. Blacks, the least intelligent of all races, will forever perform the worst on any test. Mestizos, a mixture of Amerindians, whites and descendant of African slaves, have a weighted average of scores for those 3 races. Lighter-skinned mestizos will likely have a higher score than the darker types.

Naturally, liberal elites cannot face the truth (that blacks and browns naturally have lower IQ) and have offered many excuses for educational failure of blacks and browns, but to no avail. You may fool the people, but you can't fool nature.

You can see the same dynamics with Negros. Almost every ‘successful’ negro in public eye is a mulatto. Just by looking at them you realize that these mulattoes have more white than black ancestors in their family trees. The little intelligence they have was inherited from their white ancestors. They leveraged that precious asset through affirmative action. Of course, it goes without saying that they always 'speak white’ as well.

The exception to the mulatto rule are the NFL players, who are very black. These ‘pure’ Africans run like antelopes which makes them valuable in a game where speed is of essence. Of course, many are intellectually retarded, just like their relatives in Africa who have average IQs between 65-75, compared to 100 for whites.[end of my friend's writing].

Hello guys, I'm fairly new here. I am a man in my mid 20's and I have recently come to the realization that the New World Order is run by the JEWS and is targeting WHITES. I did not know this. At first, I was raised liberal my whole life, coming from an authoritarian family :bangs head: with a liberal mother. Years of brainwashing through television, video games, and educational indoctrination forced me to believe all "races" were equal. Over the years, I became more and more conservative as I did more research on the internet. I learned about the attacks on straight, white, Christian men by feminists, blacks, and gays. I learned about the new world order and agenda 21. I learned about how the elite wish to take our land and money and combine us into a multicultural society. I taught and indoctrinated my family on white Christian values. After years of being a staunch constitutional conservative, who advocated for straight, white, Christian rights, I came across this website, and the loose ends for "who the new world order was" and "why they were doing what they were doing" became clear: They are the jews and they wish to rid the earth of whites via white genocide so they can control the inferior black and mulatto races without dispute.